(Can) Modern Local Government (be) In Touch with the People?
| DOI | 10.1177/095207679901400104 |
| Author | Josie Brooks |
| Date | 01 January 1999 |
| Published date | 01 January 1999 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
(Can)
Modern
Local
Government
(be)
In
Touch
with
the
People?
Josie
Brooks
University
of
Glamorgan
Abstract
The
recent
White
Paper,
'Modern
Local
Government:
In
Touch
with
the
People'
summarised
Labour's
project
to
modernise
local
government
and
to
renew
local
democracy.
Through
the
mediating
concepts
of
accountability,
responsiveness
and
representation,
it
is
argued
that
the
modernisation
project
will
renew
local
authorities'
political
authority
and
legitimacy.
However,
a
critical
review
of
the
White
Paper
and
other
Government's
publications
which
discuss
the
moderni-
sation
of
local
government
suggests
that
there
are
discrepancies
between
the
claims
to
improve
democratic
local
government
and
the
role
of
councils
in
the
provision
of
nationally
decided
andffunded
welfare
services.
Introduction
Local
government
in
the
United
Kingdom
has
been
justified
for
possessing
several
significant
beneficial
elements.
In
the
tradition
of
John
Stuart
Mill,
local
government
may
be
defended
because
of
its
importance
to
democracy.
Local
government's
proximity
to
its
electors
presents
opportunities
for
citizens
to
engage
in
democratic
practices
when
participating
in
the
decision
making
process.
Democracy,
when
exercised
though
a
localised
tier
of
government,
also
provides
an
avenue
for
expressing
community
identity
and
regional
diversity.
By
diffusing
power,
it
could
be
argued
that
local
councils
contribute
further
to
democratic
values
by
acting
as
a
check
on
centrally
imposed
uniformity.
Local
government
is
valued
for
its
role
as
an
important
provider
of
welfare
services
(Sharpe
1984).
Multi-functional
local
authorities,
it
is
argued,
are
more
functionally
efficient,
more
responsive
and
inventive,
while
they
are
also
better
placed
to
coordinate
different
services
than
central
government
(Wilson
&
Game
1997).
In
recent
times,
however,
these
traditional
justifica-
tions
have
lost
credibility.
Local
authorities
are
no
longer
the
primary
providers
of
services
within
their
locality
but
one
of
several
agencies
which
now
share
these
responsibilities.
Similarly,
councils
are
no
longer
the
principal
Public
Policy
and
Administration
Volume
14
No.
1
Spring
1999
42
forums
where
important
decisions
are
made,
as
many
are
now
taken
elsewhere,
often
outside
the
locality.
Since
its
election,
the
Labour
Government
has
pledged
to
modernise
councils
and
to
rejuvenate
democracy
in
local
government.
The
Government
also
plans
to
reform
service
delivery
by
councils,
to
make
it
more
responsive
to
the
needs
and
aspirations
of
their
locality.
At
the
core
of
the
Government's
strategy
to
modernise
local
government
is
their
claim
that
the
present
decision
making
structures,
specifically,
the
committee
system
is
confusing
and
inefficient.
They
claim
that
the
present
system
is
opaque
and
lacks
transparency,
which
means
that
citizens
do
not
know
who
is
making
decisions
on
their
behalf.
Public
dissatis-
faction
with
the
current
structure
of
local
government
and
councils'
poor
perfor-
mance
is
demonstrated,
suggests
the
Government,
by
the
low
turnout
at
local
government
elections.
The
Government
also
intends
to
improve
the
quality
of
local
services
by
abolishing
Compulsory
Competitive
Tendering
(CCT)
and
replacing
it
by
Best
Value.
The
Government
has
published
extensively
on
its
proposals
to
modernise
local
government.
Beginning
with
the
publication
of
six
consultation
documents
(DETR
1998a-f),
six
months
later
the
Government
published
its
response
in
a
White
paper,
'Modernising
Local
Government:
In
Touch
with
the
People'
(DETR,
1998g).
In
November
1998,
the
Government
began
its
local
government
legislative
programme
by
publishing
a
Local
Government
Bill
(Best
Value
and
Council
Tax
Regulation).
The
Government
published
a
further
Local
Government
(Organisation
and
Standards)
Bill,
although
only
in
draft
form
and
invited
comments
on
its
proposals,
which
were
discussed
in
a
Command
paper,
entitled,
'Local
Leadership,
Local
Choice'
(DETR
1999b).
The
Local
Government
Minister,
Hilary
Armstrong
and
other
modernisers
have
published
extensively
in
local
government
practitioner
journals
on
why
reform
is
essential
and
of
the
detail
of
the
modernisation
project.
The
Government
has
also
commis-
sioned
research
on
the
modernisation
project,
specifically
on
the
implementation
and
operation
of
Best
Value
and
increasing
public
participation
in
local
government
(DETR
1998h).
By
reviewing
these
publications
several
themes
are
apparent,
most
notably,
that
by
modernising
local
government,
the
Government
believes,
the
accountability
of
councils
will
be
improved.
It
is
also
anticipated
that
councils
will
become
more
representative
of
their
areas
and
responsive
to
the
needs
of
their
communities.
These
are
considerable
aspirations
and
if
they
are
to
be
met
will
require
significant
changes
to
the
culture
and
rationale
that
have
guided
local
authorities
in
the
past.
The
Purpose
of
Local
Government
The
system
of
elected
local
government
in
the
United
Kingdom
developed
incrementally
and
not
in
accordance
with
any
general
theory.
The
benefits
of
local
government
were
first
acknowledged
by
John
Stuart
Mill.
Local
government,
argued
Mill,
was
an
important
forum
for
political
education.
It
provides
opportunities
for
local
citizens
to
engage
in
democratic
practices
and,
as
such,
it
could
be
considered
as
a
training
arena
for
national
politics
(Hill
1974).
Public
Policy
and
Administration
Volume
14
No.
I
Spring
1999
43
To continue reading
Request your trial